Archive for questionable prosecution

Opinion from Jean Calder

We find it significant that, in the dreadful case of the domestic homicides of Jean Redfern and Sarah Redfern, the police spokesperson continued after the trial to refer to both killings as “murder”, despite one guilty plea of manslaughter and one of murder. Detective Chief Inspector Chris Singleton of South Yorkshire Police commented: “Peter Redfern murdered his wife and daughter in an attack that was shocking and impossible to understand.” He added “Only he knows why he committed such a violent act.” FOD shares his frustration.

We do not understand why the judge seemed so ready to accept the perpetrator’s account of his motives – especially given that the case did not go to full trial. The judge said “on the evidence (our emphasis) these tragic events would never have taken place if not for the side effects” of the cancer drugs Redfern had taken. FOD finds this hard to accept because Redfern’s guilty pleas ensured evidence was not heard or questioned.

The judge seems to have accepted the extraordinary argument that Redfern decided to kill his daughter because he did not want her to see what had happened to his wife. There was no explanation as to why this killing – if it was indeed intended to prevent suffering – was planned and carried out with such deliberate cruelty – nor why he hit her so many times with the hammer. Redfern prepared for Sarah Redfern’s return to the house “with a carrier bag, electric flex and hammer”. If he had genuinely been preparing for a quick death, he surely would not have placed a plastic bag over Sarah Redfern’s head before bludgeoning her to death, nor have secured the plastic bag with electrical flex (as he also did when he killed her mother, Jean Redfern). Despite the judge optimistically referring to “what must thankfully have been those brief moments before she died”, Sarah Redfern’s death cannot have been quick. She must in fact have died struggling, in great pain and in a state of terror.

The courts do few favours to bereaved families – and no honour to the dead – by minimising victims’ suffering. In reality, all that such statements do is to provide comfort to perpetrators. Surely, this cannot be in the public interest.

Died 22nd July 2013

Jean Redfern (67) and her daughter Sarah Redfern (33) were killed on 22nd July 2013 at their home at Wath-upon-Dearne, South Yorkshire.

Peter Redfern (70), husband and father respectively to the two victims, in January 2014 pleaded guilty to manslaughter with diminished responsibility regarding Jean Redfern and guilty to the murder of Sarah Redfern.

Redfern strangled Jean Redfern before bludgeoning Sarah Redfern to death with a hammer. A post mortem revealed that Jean Redfern suffered asphyxiation and Sarah Redfern died from severe head injuries.

At Sheffield Crown Court, the judge Mr Justice Males jailed Redfern for a minimum of 17 years and said he would almost certainly “die in prison”.

The bodies of the mother and daughter were found with plastic bags over their heads that had been secured with electrical flex. Emergency services attended the family home just after 7pm on 22nd July – after Redfern called police saying “I’ve just killed my wife and daughter.”

Following the deaths, a family member said: “The family of Jean and Sarah are devastated by the news of their deaths. Jean was a much loved sister and aunt. Sarah was a wonderful, kind and loving niece and cousin. We are at a loss to know why they died, but ask as a family that we are allowed to grieve and try to come to terms with what has happened.”

A spokesperson for Bonmarche, the Rotherham city centre shop where Sarah Redfern worked, said: “We are deeply shocked to hear the devastating news about Sarah Redfern.
Sarah was a valued member of the Rotherham Bonmarche store where she had worked for over nine years. Our thoughts are with Sarah’s family and friends at this very difficult time.”

Sarah was said to be “inseparable” from her mother.

Detective Chief Inspector Chris Singleton of South Yorkshire Police said: “Peter Redfern murdered his wife and daughter in an attack that was shocking and impossible to understand. Only he knows why he committed such a violent act. We will continue to support the family and are relieved on their behalf that they will not have to suffer the trauma of a trial.” He added “Jean and Sarah were a mother and daughter who were as close as a mother and daughter could be. Our thoughts are with Jean and Sarah’s family as they begin this next step of the grieving process.”

Sheffield Crown Court heard Redfern, a retired gas fitter, had been diagnosed with a form of incurable bone cancer in May 2013 and had signed up to a national trial for treatment with particular drug combinations.

Mr Justice Males, accepted that the drugs had caused an “adverse psychiatric reaction” which led to the killings. He said: “Studies have shown….. that in a very small percentage of cases the drugs which you took can lead to an adverse psychiatric reaction, which, when it occurs, is generally mild or moderate but in a very small number of cases can be serious. Tragically, that was to prove to be so in your case.” He said Redfern had, on the balance of probabilities, killed Jean Redfern “on impulse when your mental functioning was abnormally affected”. He accepted that the killer then made the “deliberate and dreadful decision” to kill his daughter because he did not want her to see what had happened to his wife. The judge said “When Sarah arrived home you surprised her, with a carrier bag, electric flex and hammer which you had got ready for use,”. He added “After managing to put the carrier bag over her head you killed her by hitting her repeatedly on the head with severe force.” He commented: “We cannot imagine how she must have felt in what must thankfully have been those brief moments before she died, with a bag over her head and hammer blows raining down on her.”

In setting the minimum term for the murder of Sarah he said the exercise was “in one sense academic” as, due to the killer’s age and illness, “it is as certain as anything can be that you will die in prison”.

Note: This report was drawn from reports in the Daily Mail, the BBC and wearebarnsley.com.

FOD Comment:

We note that, in this dreadful case of the domestic homicides of Jean Redfern and Sarah Redfern, the police spokesperson continued after the trial to refer to both killings as “murder”, despite one guilty plea of manslaughter and one of murder.

Detective Chief Inspector Chris Singleton of South Yorkshire Police commented: “Peter Redfern murdered his wife and daughter in an attack that was shocking and impossible to understand.” He added “Only he knows why he committed such a violent act.”

The judge, on the other hand, seems to have accepted far more readily than the police the idea that “on the evidence (our emphasis) these tragic events would never have taken place if not for the side effects” of the cancer drugs Redfern had taken. FOD finds this hard to accept because Redfern’s guilty pleas ensured evidence, in fact, was not heard.

The judge seems to have accepted the extraordinary argument that Redfern decided to kill his daughter because he did not want her to see what had happened to his wife. There was no explanation as to why this killing – if it was indeed intended to prevent suffering – was planned and carried out with such deliberate cruelty – nor why he hit her so many times with the hammer. Redfern prepared for Sarah Redfern’s return to the house “with a carrier bag, electric flex and hammer”. If he had genuinely been preparing for a quick killing, he surely would not have placed a plastic bag over Sarah Redfern’s head before bludgeoning her to death, nor have secured the plastic bag with electrical flex (as he also did when he killed her mother). Despite the judge optimistically referring to “what must thankfully have been those brief moments before she died”, Sarah Redfern’s death cannot have been quick. She must in fact have died struggling, in great pain and in a state of terror.

The courts do few favours to bereaved families – and no honour to the dead – by minimising victims’ suffering. In reality, all that such statements do is to provide comfort to perpetrators. Surely, this cannot be in the public interest.

Died 8th February 2013

Lylah Aaron (3) died on 8th February 2013 at her home in Shiregreen, Sheffield. She had suffered fatal brain injuries. Staff at her nursery described her as “bright” and a “confident, bubbly little girl”.

Lylah’s mother Precious Chibanda, a South African-born nurse, was at work at Derby Royal Infirmary and had left Lylah in the care of her boyfriend Delroy Catwell, who was supposed to take her to her nursery.

In October 2013 Catwell went on trial for Lylah’s murder at Sheffield Crown Court. He denies the charge.

It is alleged that Lylah suffered fatal brain injury after her head was slammed against a wall by Catwell. Lylah was also found to have four broken ribs and the prosecution also allege she was assaulted by Catwell several weeks before she died in February.

Sheffield Crown Court heard she was kicked, slapped and punched in the head. Catwell is said to have been jealous that the toddler was getting more attention from her mother than he was.

Bryan Cox QC, prosecuting, told the court: “The number, type and severity of the injuries sustained by Lylah make it clear she was the victim of a deliberate assault by the defendant.”

Examinations by medical specialists found both swelling and fresh bleeding around Lylah’s brain. Mr Cox said: “There were numerous bruises over her body, her face, her head and inside and behind her ears. Some of the bruises were small but many were substantial.
They included substantial bruising to her head, fractures to her ribs and bruising to her arm. The injuries indicated she had been subject to a sustained and forceful assault that had occurred within hours of her admission to hospital.”

Ms Cox also said “Doctors also found clear evidence of an earlier and quite separate assault, a healing rib fracture and earlier bleeding on the brain. Those injuries indicated she had suffered an earlier assault two to five weeks previously.”

Doctors at Sheffield Children’s Hospital found Lylah had bruises to her head and bleeding in her eyes which were fixed and dilated. A pathologist reported that the bruises to Lylah’s head were “typical of non-accidental injuries” and bruising in and behind the left ear “suggested impact from a hard object with a straight linear surface.” He added: “Other bruises could have been caused by kicks, slaps or punches.”

All the bruises were said to have been caused within 24 hours of her death.

Medical experts found scar tissue on the brain indicating a three-week-old injury and the four rib fractures. One of the fractures was about three weeks old while the other three were fresh breaks had been caused by “squeezing or compression”.

Mr Cox said the medics concluded Lylah died from repeated impacts causing fatal bleeding to the brain.

The court heard the nursery had contacted Ms Chibanda seven months earlier to say Lylah had a bruise on her neck. Catwell told Ms Chabanda Lylah had banged her head on a sink.

Staff at Lylah’s nursery described her as “bright” and a “confident, bubbly little girl”.

The prosecution allege Catwell inflicted the fatal injuries before Ms Chibanda returned from work about 4.30pm. On the day she died Lylah’s mother thought Catwell had taken her to nursery, but got a call at work from him saying the child was unwell. She returned home and checked her, but thought she was asleep. However, when she decided to wake her there was no response.

Emergency services were called to the house by Lylah’s frantic mother. Paramedics discovered Lylah’s body was rigid and attempted resuscitation. She was rushed to hospital, but doctors could not revive her and her life support machine was switched off.

Traces of Lylah’s blood were found on the carpet close to a crack in a plasterboard wall in the main bedroom of her home. The crack contained Afro-Caribbean hairs. Catwell claimed the wall had been damaged while he was attempting to kill a spider four months previously. However, the prosecution say that explanation is “implausible” and that forensic evidence points to Lylah having had her head smashed off the wall.

When arrested, Catwell said Lylah had been ill for a few days. He said she was tired and would not eat her breakfast so he put her back in bed and didn’t leave the house all day.
He told officers: “I have never hit Lylah. I didn’t cause any injuries whatsoever.’

Catwell told police the girl was full of energy and he “found it hard to deal with her demands at times.”

Mr Cox said “The couple’s relationship was generally good but sometimes he would complain he felt sidelined and she gave too much to Lylah.”

Lylah’s natural father separated from Ms Chibanda before Lylah was born. Catwell, a DJ, moved in to their home towards the end of 2011.

Died 13th June 2012

Angela Crompton (34), nee Phillips, was found severely injured on 11th June 2012 at her home in Manor Farm Cottages, in Arminghall near Norwich, and died 2 days later on 13th June at Addenbrooke’s Hospital. She had been struck with a hammer several times and had severe head injuries. She was the mother of 3 children.

Thomas Crompton (39), Ms Crompton’s husband of 3 months, admitted killing her, but denied murder. He was found guilty of manslaughter due to loss of control at Norwich Crown Court on 14th December 2012 and has been jailed for seven and a half years. Ms Crompton was his second wife.

Following her death Ms Crompton’s family said: “We have lost a daughter, sister, mother and aunt in the most horrific circumstances. Angela was a beautiful and vivacious young woman with a gift for artistry and creativity. It is a tragedy for everyone that her young life has ended so abruptly. We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the staff at the Norfolk and Norwich and Addenbrooke’s hospitals who made Angela’s final hours as bearable as possible, and our thanks to the police for their ongoing support during the impossible days ahead.”

The court heard that on the afternoon of 11th June 2012 Crompton, a sculptor, had been working with a colleague in his foundry, creating metal sculptures. When taking a break from his work and returning into the house, Crompton said he argued violently with Angela. Witnesses heard crockery being smashed. After the argument, he tried to strangle Ms Crompton, possibly causing her to pass out and then attacked her with a hammer he used in his work, hitting her several times.

Crompton told the court that as their relationship had developed he had become obsessed with ms Crompton. He said she had previously left him suddenly, which Crompton said hurt him because they had been talking about marriage. The couple subsequently did decide to marry. However, it was claimed that Ms Crompton was not happy in her husband’s house and wanted to redecorate. He claimed this caused the argument between them.

Peter Gair, prosecuting, told the court: “Angela told him she was going to start decorating and that she had started to put some of his things into a box. He was concerned his items may be damaged. He said he was really annoyed and that this turned into a massive row.”

Crompton returned to the foundry with the hammer, saying to his colleague that he had killed her. His colleague persuaded Crompton they needed to return and check on Ms Crompton who was found to be alive. Officers were called and administered first aid before Ms Crompton was taken to hospital with serious head injuries.

In interview Crompton claimed that the melting iron process is very precise and demands considerable concentration and focus. He said that he had also been worrying about Angela’s health and hadn’t slept for the previous three days.

During the trial, the defence presented a picture of Ms Crompton as someone who had had a troubled life and several abusive relationships with men. Crompton, who described Ms Crompton as “self-deprecating”, acknowledged that they had had an increasing numbers of arguments. However, he said he was not abusive, but often hurt when – he alleged – she compared him to other partners. He claimed “She used to say things to upset me and make me feel bad,”. He said he had been advised by a previous partner of Ms Crompton’s, whose relationship with her had ended badly, not to become involved with her.

A sculptor-colleague who had worked with Crompton since 2006, was in his workshop on the day of the killing. He described how Crompton returned from the house and placed a hammer on the bench in front of him saying “that is it. I have killed her”. He returned to the house with Crompton and found Ms Crompton alive. It was this colleague who called 999.

The colleague said that 10 days earlier, on 1st June Crompton had come into the workshop with bags of kitchen knives. He told his workmate that his wife had threatened to hurt herself and he wanted to keep the knives away from her.

Jurors subsequently found Crompton guilty of manslaughter due to loss of control.

Ms Crompton’s family said they were “deeply disappointed” with the outcome. In a statement released after the sentencing, they said: “The fact the defendant will only serve half of today’s sentence before being released is merely salt in the wound. His actions have left three deeply bereaved children to grow up without a mother and have put all our family through a dreadful ordeal of intensive care, funeral and court. During the court case it felt that Angela herself was on trial, and in many ways that has been the hardest part for us. We feel Angela and her family have been let down in this case by the justice system.”

On behalf of Ms Crompton’s family, her brother said:

“When Angela married Tom Crompton in March this year we all hoped she had found the stability and happiness she wanted. A little over three months later he had killed her. We do accept that the actions of Tom Crompton on 11 June 2012 were out of character. However, those actions have deprived three young children of their mother and put our entire family through a long and very painful ordeal. We are disappointed that the defence case focused on Angela’s character and personal problems as if seeking to justify Tom Crompton’s actions. We do not believe his actions on that day can ever be justified. It is true that Angela was a troubled person and we hope that she has found the peace she was always searching for in life. It is also our hope that, in time, Tom Crompton will be able to come to terms with what he did and with the consequences of his actions. Finally, our family would like to express our thanks to the Norfolk and Norwich University and Addenbrooke’s Hospitals who cared for Angela before she died and to Norfolk Police for supporting us throughout the last six difficult months.”

Detective Chief Inspector Neil Firm, of Norfolk Constabulary, said: “This was a brutal attack on someone Crompton claimed to love. Violence is never a good resolution to an argument and this is a tragic end to this couple’s relationship, leaving their children and families devastated.”

Note: This report was drawn from reports in the Norwich Evening News, the BBC, EDP24, Heart 102.4.

For Our Daughters Notes:

We view this case with horror. We find it hard to accept that a man who first strangled a woman and then lifted and used an industrial sized hammer as a weapon 3 times can be said to have lost control. We do not believe that alleged domestic ‘arguments’ or sleeplessness are any justification or excuse for such loss of control or violence and are amazed that a dispute about household decorating or displaced goods could in any sense be thought to explain homicide. We deplore the fact that Ms Crompton’s personal history was used against her in court. We are shocked at the remarkably short prison sentence imposed. We agree with Ms Crompton’s family that she and her family have been let down by a criminal justice system that appears to have put the victim on trial rather than her killer.

We note that violent and controlling men are often attracted to and target vulnerable women who have previously been victims of abusive relationships. Women who experience serial abuse by more than one partner deserve help and support – not vilification. Above all, they need a criminal justice system which works for and not against them.

Died 30th October 2010

Joanna Brown (46) was clubbed to death at Tun Cottage, her Ascot home on 30th October 2010 and then buried in a grave in Windsor Great Park. In May 2011 the case came to trial in Reading Crown Court.

Joanna Brown’s estranged husband Robert Brown (47) admitted manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, but denied murder. To the amazement of many in court, the jury found him not guilty of murder. The Judge sentenced him to 26 years in prison.

Joanna Brown was born in York, but moved when young to the Isle of Man where she developed a deep love of nature and animals. She read business studies at Bath University before embarking on a successful career in marketing.

Brown claimed he killed Joanna Brown after an argument over schools. He said he had been suffering from “severe stress” and an “abnormality of mental function” which substantially impaired his self-control.

The Prosecution alleged that, on the contrary, Brown clubbed his wife to death because he resented the pre-nuptial agreement he had signed before their marriage which left her in control of most of the assets she had inherited from her wealthy property developer father. It was her father who insisted that the agreement be signed.

The court heard that Brown attacked Joanna with a mallet or hammer “hitting her about the head and face repeatedly until she collapsed” after he brought their two children home after a half term break. Jurors heard the attack took place while the terrified children – a boy of nine and an 11-year-old girl – were in a room next door, where they could hear the blows.

Graham Reeds QC, prosecuting, said: “She suffered extensive fractures to her skull and facial bones with brain injury from which she had no prospect of surviving. After he had incapacitated her, he wrapped Jo’s body in plastic sheeting and put a bin liner or similar black plastic bag over her head in an attempt to avoid leaving bloodstains.”

Brown then bundled her body into the boot of his estate car and, with the couple’s two children also in the car, drove to his nearby home in Winkfield, Berkshire. After dropping the children with his girlfriend, Stephanie Bellemere, a BA stewardess, he buried Joanna in a plastic box in a preprepared grave in Windsor Great Park, which had been dug weeks earlier.

Brown, who was due to fly to Lagos in Nigeria that day, called the police and claimed he and his wife had had a “domestic argument”. He was arrested soon after but would not say what had happened to Ms Brown. The following day his solicitor read a prepared statement which led the police to the location of the body.

The Prosecutor said that the couple, who married in 1999, had been involved in “acrimonious and bitterly contested” divorce proceedings since 2007. Mr Reeds insisted the death had been planned. He pointed out that inside the plastic crate, officers had found rolls of tape, garden ties, latex gloves, plastic footwear and two white overalls on Joanna’s body. They also found a rubber mallet.

Mr Reeds said: “The remote location of the grave, the advanced preparation of it, and the collection of materials needed to dispose of her body are, the prosecution say, clear indicators that the defendant had planned to murder his wife and to dispose of her body intending that she never be found.”

Ms Brown’s grief-stricken mother Diana Parkes (72) is now caring for her daughter’s two children. It was a bitter blow to her that her son-in-law was cleared of murder despite having buried Ms Brown’s body in a pre-dug grave.

Ms Parkes remains very angry with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). She believes prosecuting lawyers neglected to present key evidence – including a knife – and allowed Brown to claim without sufficient contradiction that he was a victim of a messy divorce. Ms Parkes lodged a formal complaint with the CPS.

She said she wants prosecutors “to listen more to the victim’s family. We told the prosecutor all about divorce, which was all the defence talked about, but he just said ‘trivia, trivia’. He should have listened to us. The police were fantastic but the CPS let them down. I will just have to keep fighting for justice for Jo and to make sure this never happens to another family again.”

Ms Parkes points out that there had been prior violence. In July 2007 Brown took a knife to his wife in a jealous rage after suspecting she was having an affair. She fled to her mother in the Isle of Man, saying the marriage was finally over and starting divorce proceedings.
In an attempt to avoid a battle over her fortune, she offered Brown a £500,000 settlement in March 2008, but he rejected it, claiming he had been “stitched up” by the prenup.

Brown, a former British Airways pilot, who was earning £135,000 from his job with BA, claimed Ms Brown was hiding her assets from him. Her friends insist she was in fact struggling to make ends meet, and was forced to open her award-winning B&B business in her home in an effort to stay afloat financially.

After three years of fighting the bitter case was eventually due to be concluded on 8th November, 2010. The judge said he would be guided by the conclusion of the Katrin Radmacher divorce, a test case involving a German heiress who was contesting the validity of prenups in UK law. After the judge in the Radmacher case ruled the agreements were legally binding, Joanna Brown and her family thought their ordeal was finally over, and that their fortune would remain largely intact.

Instead, just a week before the divorce should have been finalised, Brown killed her.